Drug-Drug Interaction of Letermovir and Atorvastatin in Healthy Participants

Letermovir (MK-8228/AIC246) is a cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA terminase complex inhibitor for CMV prophylaxis in adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant. It is cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A inhibitor and inhibits organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1/3 and breast cancer resistance protein transporters. Atorvastatin (ATV), a commonly used treatment for hypercholesterolemia, is a substrate of organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1, potentially breast cancer resistance protein, and CYP3A. As letermovir may be coadministered with ATV, the effect of multiple-dose letermovir 480 mg once daily on the pharmacokinetics of single-dose ATV 20 mg and its metabolites (ortho-hydroxyatorvastatin [o-OH-ATV] and para-hydroxyatorvastatin [p-OH-ATV]) was evaluated in an open-label trial in healthy female adults (N = 14). ATV area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity and maximum plasma concentration (C_max ) increased ≈3-fold with letermovir coadministration. The time to ATV C_max also increased, while apparent clearance decreased. The exposures of o-OH-ATV and p-OH-ATV were comparable in the presence versus absence of letermovir; however, o-OH-ATV C_max decreased by 60% with coadministration, while p-OH-ATV C_max was similar. Due to the increase in ATV exposure with letermovir coadministration, statin-associated adverse events such as myopathy should be closely monitored following coadministration. The dose of ATV should not exceed 20 mg daily when coadministered with letermovir.

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single- and multiple-dose administration of islatravir (MK-8591) in adults without HIV

Islatravir (MK‐8591) is a nucleoside analogue in development for the treatment and prevention of HIV‐1. Two phase 1 trials were conducted during initial evaluation of islatravir: rising single doses (Study 1) and rising multiple doses (Study 2) of oral islatravir in male and female participants without HIV (aged 18–60 years). Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of islatravir (plasma) and islatravir‐triphosphate (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) were assessed. In Study 1, 24 participants, assigned to 1 of 3 panels, received alternating single doses of islatravir in a fasted state from 5 mg to 400 mg, or placebo, over 3 dosing periods; a 30 mg dose was additionally assessed following a high‐fat meal. In Study 2, 8 participants per dose received 3 once‐weekly doses of 10, 30, or 100 mg islatravir or placebo in a fasted state. For each panel in both trials, 6 participants received active drug and 2 received placebo. Islatravir was generally well‐tolerated, with no serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Islatravir was rapidly absorbed (median time to maximum plasma concentration 0.5 hours); plasma half‐life was 49–61 h; intracellular islatravir‐triphosphate half‐life was 118–171 h. Plasma exposure increased in an approximately dose‐proportional manner; there was no meaningful food effect. There was a modest degree of intracellular islatravir‐triphosphate accumulation after multiple weekly dosing. After single oral doses of islatravir greater than or equal to 5 mg, intracellular islatravir‐triphosphate levels were comparable to levels associated with efficacy in preclinical studies. These results warrant continued clinical investigation of islatravir.

Evaluation of Pharmacokinetic Drug Interactions of the Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents Elbasvir and Grazoprevir with Pitavastatin, Rosuvastatin, Pravastatin, and Atorvastatin in Healthy Adults

BACKGROUND

Many people infected with hepatitis C virus have comorbidities, including hypercholesterolemia, that are treated with statins. In this study, we evaluated the drug-drug interaction potential of the hepatitis C virus inhibitors elbasvir (EBR) and grazoprevir (GZR) with statins. Pitavastatin, rosuvastatin, pravastatin, and atorvastatin are substrates of organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B, whereas rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are also breast cancer resistance protein substrates.

METHODS

Three open-label, phase I clinical trials in healthy adults were conducted with multiple daily doses of oral GZR or EBR/GZR and single oral doses of statins. Trial 1: GZR 200 mg plus pitavastatin 10 mg. Trial 2: Part 1, GZR 200 mg plus rosuvastatin 10 mg, then EBR 50 mg/GZR 200 mg plus rosuvastatin 10 mg; Part 2, EBR 50 mg/GZR 200 mg plus pravastatin 40 mg. Trial 3: EBR 50 mg/GZR 200 mg plus atorvastatin 10 mg.

RESULTS

Neither GZR nor EBR pharmacokinetics were meaningfully affected by statins. Coadministration of EBR/GZR did not result in clinically relevant changes in the exposure of pitavastatin or pravastatin. However, EBR/GZR increased exposure to rosuvastatin (126%) and atorvastatin (94%). Coadministration of statins plus GZR or EBR/GZR was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Although statins do not appreciably affect EBR or GZR pharmacokinetics, EBR/GZR can impact the pharmacokinetics of certain statins, likely via inhibition of breast cancer resistance protein but not organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B. Coadministration of EBR/GZR with pitavastatin or pravastatin does not require adjustment of either dose of statin, whereas the dose of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin should be decreased when coadministered with EBR/GZR.

Atogepant Is Not Associated With Clinically Meaningful Alanine Aminotransferase Elevations in Healthy Adults

Atogepant is a potent, selective, oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist in development for migraine prevention. The chemical structure of atogepant is distinct from previous CGRP receptor antagonists, which were associated with elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in clinical trials. Here, we report the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of a once‐daily supratherapeutic dose (170 mg) of atogepant for 28 days from a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase I trial in healthy participants. Overall safety, hepatic safety, and plasma PK parameters were evaluated. Thirty‐four participants aged 23–55 years enrolled; 28 (82.4%) completed the study in accordance with the protocol. Multiple doses of 170 mg atogepant for 28 consecutive days were generally well‐tolerated. All adverse events (AEs; reported in 87.0% of the atogepant group; 72.7%, placebo) were mild in severity except one serious AE of subarachnoid hemorrhage due to a bicycle accident and not considered related to treatment. There were two discontinuations due to AEs, both with atogepant, one considered possibly related to treatment. Over 28 days of treatment, no participant receiving atogepant had an ALT elevation above 1.5 × upper limit of normal. Change from baseline in serum ALT levels was not different between atogepant and placebo. Atogepant is rapidly absorbed (median time to maximum plasma concentration, ~ 2 hours) with an apparent terminal half‐life of ~ 11 hours, and no evidence of accumulation after once‐daily dosing. Overall, atogepant at a high oral dose is safe and well‐tolerated in healthy participants with no clinically meaningful elevations in ALT.

Assessment of Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Letermovir and Fluconazole in Healthy Participants

Letermovir is a prophylactic agent for cytomegalovirus infection and disease in adult cytomegalovirus-seropositive recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. As the antifungal agent fluconazole is administered frequently in transplant recipients, a drug-drug interaction study was conducted between oral letermovir and oral fluconazole. A phase 1 open-label, fixed-sequence study was performed in healthy females (N = 14, 19-55 years). In Period 1, a single dose of fluconazole 400 mg was administered. Following a 14-day washout, a single dose of letermovir 480 mg was administered (Period 2), and after a 7-day washout, single doses of fluconazole 400 mg and letermovir 480 mg were coadministered in Period 3. Pharmacokinetics and safety were evaluated. The pharmacokinetics of fluconazole and letermovir were not meaningfully changed following coadministration. Fluconazole geometric mean ratio (GMR; 90% confidence interval [CI]) with letermovir for area under the concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC_0-∞ ) was 1.03 (0.99-1.08); maximum concentration (C_max ) was 0.95 (0.92-0.99). Letermovir AUC_0-∞ GMR (90%CI) was 1.11 (1.01-1.23), and C_max was 1.06 (0.93-1.21) following coadministration with fluconazole. Coadministration of fluconazole and letermovir was generally well tolerated.

Assessment of drug interaction potential between the HCV direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir/grazoprevir and the HIV integrase inhibitors raltegravir and dolutegravir

BACKGROUND

Elbasvir/grazoprevir is a once-daily fixed-dose combination therapy for the treatment of chronic HCV infection, including HCV/HIV coinfection.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction of elbasvir and grazoprevir with raltegravir or dolutegravir.

METHODS

Three open-label trials in healthy adult participants were conducted. In the raltegravir trials, participants received a single dose of raltegravir 400 mg, a single dose of elbasvir 50 mg or grazoprevir 200 mg, and raltegravir with either elbasvir or grazoprevir. In the dolutegravir trial, participants received a single dose of dolutegravir 50 mg alone or co-administered with once-daily elbasvir 50 mg and grazoprevir 200 mg.

RESULTS

The raltegravir AUC0-∞ geometric mean ratio (GMR) (90% CI) was 1.02 (0.81-1.27) with elbasvir and 1.43 (0.89-2.30) with grazoprevir. Dolutegravir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 1.16 (1.00-1.34) with elbasvir and grazoprevir. The elbasvir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 0.81 (0.57-1.17) with raltegravir and 0.98 (0.93-1.04) with dolutegravir. The grazoprevir AUC0-24 GMR (90% CI) was 0.89 (0.72-1.09) with raltegravir and 0.81 (0.67-0.97) with dolutegravir.

CONCLUSIONS

Elbasvir or grazoprevir co-administered with raltegravir or dolutegravir resulted in no clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions and was generally well tolerated. These results support the assertion that no dose adjustments for elbasvir, grazoprevir, raltegravir or dolutegravir are needed for co-administration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people.

Ubrogepant Is Not Associated With Clinically Meaningful Elevations of Alanine Aminotransferase in Healthy Adult Males

Ubrogepant is a novel, oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist intended for the acute treatment of migraine attacks. Ubrogepant has a chemical structure distinct from previous small-molecule CGRP receptor antagonists that were associated with elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in clinical trials. Here, we report overall and hepatic safety data from two placebo-controlled phase I trials of ubrogepant, spray-dried oral compressed tablet (SD-OCT) in healthy male volunteers. Trial A was a pharmacokinetic (PK) trial of single (100-400 mg) and multiple (40-400 mg) ascending doses. Trial B was a dedicated hepatic safety trial assessing daily use of ubrogepant 150 mg for 28 days. Serum ALT (as hepatotoxicity biomarker) and PK data are reported. Ubrogepant was well-tolerated in both trials, with a low incidence of adverse events that did not differ greatly from placebo. Changes in mean ALT levels were minimal and similar to placebo. Over 28 days of treatment, the mean percentage change in ALT from baseline was < 5% at all time points. No participant in either trial demonstrated ALT ≥ 3× upper limit of normal at any time. Ubrogepant SD-OCT demonstrated linear PK appropriate for acute treatment of migraine, with rapid uptake (time of maximum plasma concentration (t_max ): 2-3 hours) and no accumulation with daily use. Overall, there was no evidence of ubrogepant-associated hepatotoxicity with daily doses up to 400 mg for 10 days or with daily ubrogepant 150 mg for 28 days. Supratherapeutic dosing is a useful strategy for characterizing hepatic safety in early drug development.

Thorough QTc Evaluation and the Safety of Supratherapeutic Doses of Odanacatib in Healthy Subjects

Assessing risk for QTc interval prolongation in a thorough QTc study is a standard recommendation when evaluating new chemical entities. As part of the clinical development program for odanacatib, an oral selective inhibitor of cathepsin K previously in development for the treatment of osteoporosis, 2 clinical studies in healthy subjects assessed pharmacokinetics and overall safety (including potential for delayed ventricular repolarization) of a supratherapeutic dose. In study 1, subjects received a supratherapeutic dose regimen of odanacatib (300 mg on day 1, then daily multiple doses of 25 mg to day 21) or placebo. In study 2 (days 1-4), subjects received the odanacatib supratherapeutic dose regimen or moxifloxacin (positive control, single 400-mg dose on day 4; matching placebo for odanacatib/moxifloxacin) or placebo. All doses were administered with a high-fat meal. In study 1 (N = 12), the supratherapeutic dosing regimen achieved exposure ∼3.5-fold of the proposed therapeutic dose (50 mg once weekly) and was sufficiently well tolerated to permit assessment in the thorough QTc study (study 2). In study 2 (N = 116), the primary objective was placebo-corrected change from baseline in QTcF interval (Fridericia's correction), assessed by replicate electrocardiograms (12-lead Holter recordings; days -1 through 7). Supratherapeutic odanacatib dosing was not associated with increased risk of prolonged QT interval, unlike moxifloxacin (confirming assay sensitivity). Pooled safety data across both studies suggested that the safety profile of odanacatib at high exposures was similar to placebo, with a small clustering of oral cavity adverse events. Odanacatib was not associated with increased risk of prolonged QT interval.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between the Fixed-Dose Combinations of Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine and Elbasvir/Grazoprevir in Healthy Adult Participants

Treatment of individuals coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) requires careful consideration of potential drug-drug interactions. The pharmacokinetic interaction of the HCV fixed-dose combination treatment of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) when coadministered with the fixed-dose combination HIV treatment of elvitegravir/cobicistat/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (EVG/COB/TDF/FTC) was evaluated in 22 healthy adults. In period 1, oral doses of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC (150 mg/150 mg/300 mg/200 mg) were administered once daily for 7 days. In period 2, oral doses of EBR/GZR (50 mg/100 mg) were administered once daily for 10 days. In period 3, oral doses of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC were coadministered with EBR/GZR once daily for 10 days. The pharmacokinetics of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC were not clinically meaningfully altered by concomitant EBR/GZR administration. Geometric mean ratios (90%CIs) for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours (AUC_0-24 ) in the presence/absence of EBR/GZR were 1.1 (1.0, 1.2) for elvitegravir; 1.1 (1.0, 1.1) for emtricitabine; 1.2 (1.1, 1.2) for tenofovir; and 1.5 (1.4, 1.6) for cobicistat. In comparison, the AUC_0-24 of elbasvir was ∼2 times higher and the AUC_0-24 of grazoprevir was ∼5 times higher following concomitant administration of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC and EBR/GZR. Geometric mean ratios (90%CI) for AUC_0-24 in the presence/absence of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC were 2.2 (2.0, 2.4) for elbasvir and 5.4 (4.5, 6.4) for grazoprevir. Coadministration of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC and EBR/GZR was generally well tolerated in healthy adults in this study. Nevertheless, because of the increased GZR exposure that occurs with coadministration of EVG/COB/TDF/FTC and EBR/GZR, coadministration of this combination is not recommended in those coinfected with HIV and HCV.

Assessment of Drug Interaction Potential Between the Hepatitis C Virus Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents Elbasvir/Grazoprevir and the Nucleotide Analog Reverse-Transcriptase Inhibitor Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

Treatment of individuals coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) requires careful consideration of potential drug-drug interactions. We evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction of the direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir and grazoprevir coadministered with the nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). Three open-label, multidose studies in healthy adults were conducted. In the first study (N = 10), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily, elbasvir 50 mg once daily, and elbasvir coadministered with TDF. In the second study (N = 12), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily, grazoprevir 200 mg once daily, and grazoprevir coadministered with TDF. In the third study (N = 14), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily and TDF 300 mg coadministered with coformulated elbasvir/grazoprevir 50 mg/100 mg once daily. Pharmacokinetics and safety were evaluated. Following coadministration, the tenofovir area under the plasma concentration-time curve to 24 hours and maximum plasma concentration geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for tenofovir and coadministered drug(s) versus tenofovir were 1.3 (1.2, 1.5) and 1.5 (1.3, 1.6), respectively, when coadministered with elbasvir; 1.2 (1.1, 1.3) and 1.1 (1.0, 1.2), respectively, when coadministered with grazoprevir; and 1.3 (1.2, 1.4) and 1.1 (1.0, 1.4), respectively, when coadministered with the elbasvir/grazoprevir coformulation. TDF had minimal effect on elbasvir and grazoprevir pharmacokinetics. Elbasvir and/or grazoprevir coadministered with TDF resulted in no clinically meaningful tenofovir exposure increases and was generally well tolerated, with no deaths, serious adverse events (AEs), discontinuations due to AEs, or laboratory AEs reported. No dose adjustments for elbasvir/grazoprevir or TDF are needed for coadministration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people.

Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interactions Between Letermovir and the Immunosuppressants Cyclosporine, Tacrolimus, Sirolimus, and Mycophenolate Mofetil

Letermovir (AIC246, MK-8228) is a human cytomegalovirus terminase inhibitor indicated for the prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus infection and disease in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients that is also being investigated for use in other transplant settings. Many transplant patients receive immunosuppressant drugs, of which several have narrow therapeutic ranges. There is a potential for the coadministration of letermovir with these agents, and any potential effect on their pharmacokinetics (PK) must be understood. Five phase 1 trials were conducted in 73 healthy female participants to evaluate the effect of letermovir on the PK of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, sirolimus, and mycophenolic acid (active metabolite of mycophenolate mofetil [MMF]), as well as the effect of cyclosporine and MMF on letermovir PK. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Coadministration of letermovir with cyclosporine, tacrolimus, and sirolimus resulted in 1.7-, 2.4-, and 3.4-fold increases in area under the plasma concentration-time curve and 1.1-, 1.6-, and 2.8-fold increases in maximum plasma concentration, respectively, of the immunosuppressants. Coadministration of letermovir and MMF had no meaningful effect on the PK of mycophenolic acid. Coadministration with cyclosporine increased letermovir area under the plasma concentration-time curve by 2.1-fold and maximum plasma concentration by 1.5-fold, while coadministration with MMF did not meaningfully affect the PK of letermovir. Given the increased exposures of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, and sirolimus, frequent monitoring of concentrations should be performed during administration and at discontinuation of letermovir, with dose adjustment as needed. These data support the reduction in clinical dosage of letermovir (to 240 mg) upon coadministration with cyclosporine.

Effect of CYP3A Inhibition and Induction on the Pharmacokinetics of Suvorexant: Two Phase I, Open-Label, Fixed-Sequence Trials in Healthy Subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Suvorexant is an orexin receptor antagonist indicated for the treatment of insomnia, characterized by difficulties with sleep onset and/or sleep maintenance. As suvorexant is metabolized primarily by Cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A), and its pharmacokinetics may be affected by CYP3A modulators, the effects of CYP3A inhibitors (ketoconazole or diltiazem) or an inducer (rifampin [rifampicin]) on the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of suvorexant were investigated.

METHODS

In two Phase I, open-label, fixed-sequence trials (Studies P008 and P038), healthy subjects received a single oral dose of suvorexant followed by co-administration with multiple once-daily doses of strong/moderate CYP3A inhibitors (ketoconazole/diltiazem) or a strong CYP3A inducer (rifampin). Treatments were administered in the morning: suvorexant 4 mg with ketoconazole 400 mg (Study P008; N = 10), suvorexant 20 mg with diltiazem 240 mg (Study P038; N = 20), and suvorexant 40 mg with rifampin 600 mg (Study P038; N = 10). Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC_0-∞), maximum plasma concentration (C_max), half-life (t_½), and time to C_max (t_max) were derived from plasma concentrations of suvorexant collected at prespecified time points up to 10 days following CYP3A inhibitor/inducer co-administration. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

RESULTS

Co-administration with ketoconazole resulted in increased exposure to suvorexant [AUC_0-∞: geometric mean ratio (GMR); 90% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 (2.35, 3.31)] while co-administration with diltiazem resulted in a lesser effect [GMR (90% CI): 2.05 (1.82, 2.30)]. Co-administration with rifampin led to a marked decrease (88%) in suvorexant exposure. Consistent with morning administration and known suvorexant pharmacology, somnolence was the most frequently reported AE.

CONCLUSIONS

These results are consistent with expectations that strong CYP3A inhibitors and inducers exert marked effects on suvorexant pharmacokinetics. In the context of a limited sample size, single suvorexant doses were generally well tolerated in healthy subjects when co-administered with/without a CYP3A inhibitor/inducer.

No Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Elbasvir or Grazoprevir and Buprenorphine/Naloxone in Healthy Participants and Participants Receiving Stable Opioid Agonist Therapy

The aims of these phase I trials were to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction between elbasvir (EBR) or grazoprevir (GZR) and buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NAL). Trial 1 was a single-dose trial in healthy participants. Trial 2 was a multiple-dose trial in participants on BUP/NAL maintenance therapy. Coadministration of EBR or GZR with BUP/NAL had minimal effect on the pharmacokinetics of BUP/NAL, EBR, and GZR. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs (90% CI)) for BUP, norbuprenorphine, and NAL AUC0-∞ were 0.98 (0.89-1.08), 0.97 (0.86-1.09), and 0.88 (0.78-1.00) in the presence/absence of EBR; 0.98 (0.81-1.19), 1.13 (0.97-1.32), and 1.10 (0.82-1.47) in the presence/absence of GZR. The GMRs (90% CI) for EBR and GZR AUC0-∞ in the absence/presence of BUP/NAL were 1.22 (0.98-1.52) and 0.86 (0.63-1.18). In conclusion, no dose adjustment for BUP/NAL, EBR, or GZR is required for patients with HCV infection receiving EBR/GZR and BUP/NAL maintenance therapy.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Single-Dose Elbasvir in Participants with Hepatic Impairment

BACKGROUND

The combination of elbasvir and grazoprevir is approved for the treatment of hepatitis C virus genotype 1 or 4 infection.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of single-dose elbasvir 50 mg in participants with hepatic impairment.

METHODS

Participants with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment and age-, sex-, and weight-matched healthy controls were enrolled in a 3-part, open-label, sequential-panel, single-dose pharmacokinetic study. Blood samples were collected to assess pharmacokinetics. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the study.

RESULTS

Thirty-four participants were enrolled: eight with mild hepatic impairment, 11 with moderate hepatic impairment, seven with severe hepatic impairment, and eight healthy matched controls. Participants with mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment demonstrated a numeric, but not statistically significant, decrease in elbasvir exposure compared with controls, with a mean 39, 28, and 12% decrease in area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity, as well as a 42, 31, and 42% decrease in maximum plasma concentration (C _max), respectively. The observed median time to C _max was similar in participants with hepatic impairment and controls. Single-dose administration of elbasvir was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetics of elbasvir after a single, oral 50-mg dose were not clinically meaningfully altered in non-HCV-infected participants with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic dysfunction. However, since elbasvir is currently available only as part of a fixed-dose combination with grazoprevir, the fixed-dose combination should not be administered to patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment, due to the significantly increased plasma grazoprevir exposures in those populations.

No Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Elbasvir or Grazoprevir and Methadone in Participants Receiving Maintenance Opioid Agonist Therapy

We conducted two phase I trials to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interactions between elbasvir (EBR), grazoprevir (GZR), and methadone (MK‐8742‐P010 and MK‐5172‐P030) in non‐hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐infected participants on methadone maintenance therapy. Coadministration of EBR or GZR with methadone had no clinically meaningful effect on EBR, GZR, or methadone pharmacokinetics. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for R‐ and S‐methadone AUC_0‐24 were 1.03 (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.92–1.15) and 1.09 (90% CI, 0.94–1.26) in the presence/absence of EBR; and 1.09 (90% CI, 1.02–1.17) and 1.23 (90% CI, 1.12–1.35) in the presence/absence of GZR. The GMRs for EBR and GZR AUC_0‐24 in participants receiving methadone relative to a healthy historical cohort not receiving methadone were 1.20 (90% CI, 0.94–1.53) and 1.03 (90% CI, 0.76–1.41), respectively. These results indicate that no dose adjustment is required for individuals with HCV infection receiving stable methadone therapy and the EBR/GZR fixed‐dose regimen.

Single-Dose and Multiple-Dose Pharmacokinetics of Vaniprevir in Healthy Men

Vaniprevir is an inhibitor of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease. The aim of these double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase I studies was to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of vaniprevir in healthy male volunteers. The primary objective for both studies was the safety and tolerability of vaniprevir. Single‐dose and steady‐state pharmacokinetics were also assessed. In both studies, there was no apparent relationship between the frequency or intensity of adverse events and vaniprevir dose. At single doses >20 mg, the plasma area under the curve (AUC)_0–∞ and maximum concentration (C_max) increased in a greater‐than‐dose‐proportional manner. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs; fed/fasted) were 1.22 and 0.79 for AUC_0–∞ and C_max, respectively. Following multiple doses, GMR accumulations for AUC_0–12h and C_max (day 14/day 1) ranged from 1.53 to 1.90 and from 1.41 to 1.92, respectively. These data support the use of vaniprevir with peginterferon and ribavirin in patients with HCV infection.

No Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between the Hepatitis C Virus Inhibitors Elbasvir/Grazoprevir and Famotidine or Pantoprazole

Use of agents to suppress gastric acid secretion is common among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The aims of this open‐label, three‐period, fixed‐sequence study were to evaluate the effect of famotidine and pantoprazole on the pharmacokinetics and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir fixed‐dose combination (FDC) in 16 healthy subjects. Elbasvir and grazoprevir each exhibited similar pharmacokinetics following single‐dose administration of elbasvir/grazoprevir with or without famotidine or pantoprazole. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of grazoprevir AUC(0,∞), C_max, and C₂₄ (elbasvir/grazoprevir + famotidine or elbasvir/grazoprevir + pantoprazole vs. elbasvir/grazoprevir) ranged from 0.89–1.17. Similarly, GMRs of elbasvir AUC(0,∞), C_max, and C₂₄ (elbasvir/grazoprevir + famotidine or elbasvir/grazoprevir + pantoprazole vs. elbasvir/grazoprevir) ranged from 1.02–1.11. These results indicate that gastric acid‐reducing agents do not modify the pharmacokinetics of elbasvir or grazoprevir in a clinically relevant manner and may be coadministered with elbasvir/grazoprevir in HCV‐infected patients without restriction.

Psychomotor effects, pharmacokinetics and safety of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant administered in combination with alcohol in healthy subjects

A double-blind crossover study investigated psychomotor effects, pharmacokinetics, and safety of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant with and without alcohol. Healthy adults (n=31) were randomized to receive placebo or suvorexant (40 mg) plus placebo solution or alcohol (0.7 g/kg) in each of four treatments (single doses; morning administration). The US Food and Drug Administration approved suvorexant dose is 10 mg (up to 20 mg) daily. Pharmacodynamic effects were assessed using tests of digit vigilance (DVT; primary endpoint), choice reaction time, digit symbol substitution, numeric working memory, immediate/delayed word recall, body sway and subjective alertness. Suvorexant alone did not significantly affect DVT reaction time, but did impact some pharmacodynamic tests. Suvorexant with alcohol increased reaction time versus either alone (mean difference at 2 h: 44 ms versus suvorexant, p<0.001; 24 ms, versus alcohol, p<0.05) and had additive negative effects on tests of vigilance, working/episodic memory, postural stability and alertness. No effects of suvorexant alone or with alcohol were observed by 9 h. No important changes in pharmacokinetic parameters were observed upon co-administration. All treatments were generally well tolerated without serious adverse events. In conclusion, co-administration of 40 mg suvorexant and 0.7 g/kg alcohol had additive negative psychomotor effects. Patients are advised not to consume alcohol with suvorexant.

Lack of meaningful effect of ridaforolimus on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam in cancer patients: model prediction and clinical confirmation

Ridaforolimus, a unique non-prodrug analog of rapamycin, is a potent inhibitor of mTOR under development for cancer treatment. In vitro data suggest ridaforolimus is a reversible and time-dependent inhibitor of CYP3A. A model-based evaluation suggested an increase in midazolam area under the curve (AUC(0- ∞)) of between 1.13- and 1.25-fold in the presence of therapeutic concentrations of ridaforolimus. The pharmacokinetic interaction between multiple oral doses of ridaforolimus and a single oral dose of midazolam was evaluated in an open-label, fixed-sequence study, in which cancer patients received a single oral dose of 2 mg midazolam followed by 5 consecutive daily single oral doses of 40 mg ridaforolimus with a single dose of 2 mg midazolam with the fifth ridaforolimus dose. Changes in midazolam exposure were minimal [geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals: 1.23 (1.07, 1.40) for AUC(0-∞) and 0.92 (0.82, 1.03) for maximum concentrations (C(max)), respectively]. Consistent with model predictions, ridaforolimus had no clinically important effect on midazolam pharmacokinetics and is not anticipated to be a perpetrator of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) when coadministered with CYP3A substrates. Model-based approaches can provide reasonable estimates of DDI liability, potentially obviating the need to conduct dedicated DDI studies especially in challenging populations like cancer patients.

Odanacatib, a selective cathepsin K inhibitor to treat osteoporosis: safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics--results from single oral dose studies in healthy volunteers

AIMS

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of odanacatib (ODN), a cathepsin K inhibitor, in humans.

METHODS

Two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single oral dose studies were performed with ODN (2-600 mg) in 44 healthy volunteers (36 men and eight postmenopausal women).

RESULTS

Adverse experiences (AEs) with single doses of ODN were transient and mild to moderate, with the exception of one severe AE of gastroenteritis. Headache was the most frequent AE. After absorption of ODN (initial peak concentrations 4-6 h postdose), plasma concentrations exhibited a monophasic decline, with an apparent terminal half-life of ∼40-80 h. The area under the curve0-24 hours (AUC(0-24 h)), concentration at 24 hours (C(24 h)) and maximum concentration (C(max,overal)) increased in a less than dose-proportional manner from 2 to 600 mg. Administration of ODN with a high-fat meal led to ∼100% increases in AUC(0-24 h), C(max,day1), C(max,overall) and C(24 h) relative to the fasted state, while administration with a low-fat meal led to a ∼30% increase in those parameters. Reduction of biomarkers of bone resorption, the C- and N-telopeptides of cross-links of type I collagen, (CTx and NTx, respectively), was noted at 24 h for doses ≥5 mg and at 168 h postdose for ≥10 mg. In postmenopausal women administered 50 mg ODN, reductions in serum CTx of -66% and urine NTx/creatinine (uNTx/Cr) of -51% relative to placebo were observed at 24 h. At 168 h, reductions in serum CTx (-70%) and uNTx/Cr (-78%) were observed relative to baseline. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling characterized the ODN concentration/uNTx/Cr relation, with a modeled EC50 value of 43.8 nM and ∼80% maximal reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Odanacatib was well tolerated and has a pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile suitable for once weekly dosing.

Lack of hemodynamic interaction between CGRP-receptor antagonist telcagepant (MK-0974) and sumatriptan: results from a randomized study in patients with migraine

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to assess the effects of sumatriptan monotherapy, telcagepant monotherapy, and their combination on blood pressure (BP) in migraine patients during a headache-free period.

METHODS

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-period, single-dose, randomized crossover study in 24 migraine patients was conducted. In each period, patients received a single oral dose of sumatriptan 100 mg alone, telcagepant 600 mg alone, sumatriptan 100 mg coadministered with telcagepant 600 mg, or placebo. Semi-recumbent BP was measured pre-dose and at seven post-dose time points over a period of six hours. Individual time-weighted averages in mean arterial pressure (MAP) were evaluated using a linear mixed-effects model. The pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan alone and in the presence of telcagepant were also evaluated using limited sampling times.

RESULTS

The mean difference in time-weighted (0-2.5 h) MAP (90% confidence interval) was 1.2 mmHg (-0.2, 2.7) between telcagepant and placebo, 4.0 mmHg (2.5, 5.5) between sumatriptan and placebo, and 1.5 mmHg (0.0, 3.0) between telcagepant with sumatriptan vs sumatriptan alone. When coadministered with telcagepant, the AUC0-6h and C(max) of sumatriptan were increased by 23% and 24%, respectively. The small MAP increases observed after coadministration could possibly be associated with the slight elevations in sumatriptan levels.

CONCLUSION

Telcagepant does not elevate mean MAP, and coadministration of telcagepant with sumatriptan results in elevations in MAP similar to those observed following administration of sumatriptan alone in migraineurs during the interictal period. When coadministered, telcagepant slightly increases the plasma levels of sumatriptan, but without an apparent clinically meaningful effect.

Lack of Effect of Aprepitant on Hydrodolasetron Pharmacokinetics in CYP2D6 Extensive and Poor Metabolizers

To prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, aprepitant is given with a corticosteroid and a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 antagonist, such as dolasetron. Dolasetron is converted to the active metabolite hydrodolasetron, which is cleared largely via CYP2D6. The authors determined whether aprepitant, a moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor, alters hydrodolasetron pharmacokinetics in CYP2D6 poor and extensive metabolizers. Six CYP2D6 poor and 6 extensive metabolizers were randomized in an open-label, crossover fashion to treatment A (dolasetron 100 mg on day 1) and treatment B (dolasetron 100 mg plus aprepitant 125 mg on day 1, aprepitant 80 mg on days 2-3). For hydrodolasetron area under the concentration-versus-time curve (AUC0-infinity) and peak plasma concentration (Cmax), geometric mean ratios (B/A) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) fell below the predefined limit (2.0) for clinical significance (AUC0-infinity, 1.09 [90% CI, 1.01-1.18], Cmax, 1.08 [90% CI, 0.94-1.24]). Aprepitant did not affect the pharmacokinetics of hydrodolasetron, regardless of CYP2D6 metabolizer type, and was generally well tolerated when coadministered with dolasetron in volunteers.

The Dose Proportionality of Telcagepant after Administration of Single Oral and Intravenous Doses in Healthy Adult Subjects

INTRODUCTION: Telcagepant (MK-0974) is a novel, orally active and selective CGRP receptor antagonist being investigated for acute treatment of migraine. Early clinical data suggested greater than dose proportional increases in exposure following oral administration. The aim of the present studies was to definitively characterize the oral and IV dose proportionality of telcagepant. METHODS: Healthy adult subjects were enrolled in two separate open-label randomized dose proportionality studies: 1) single oral dose crossover from 50 to 600 mg (N = 19); 2) single IV dose parallel group from 5 to 250 mg (N = 10 per dose). Blood samples were collected at time points from 0 to 48 hours postdose. RESULTS: Telcagepant was rapidly absorbed with a T(max) of approximately 1 to 2 hours after oral administration. The terminal half-life was approximately 8 to 9 hours after IV dosing and approximately 4 to 7 hours after oral dosing. Oral administration of telcagepant resulted in greater than dose proportional increases in exposure, while IV administration resulted in approximately dose proportional increases in exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Telcagepant was generally well tolerated. Oral telcagepant exhibits non-linear pharmacokinetics.

Double-blind crossover study to assess potential differences in cytochrome P450 3A4 activity in healthy subjects receiving ondansetron plus dexamethasone, with and without aprepitant

PURPOSE

Because glucocorticoids and the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant influence CYP3A4 activity, this study assessed whether aprepitant added to a 5-HT(3) antagonist and glucocorticoid would affect CYP3A4 induction.

METHODS

In this double-blind, 2-period crossover study, 12 subjects were randomized to receive a triple regimen (oral aprepitant [A] 125 mg, intravenous ondansetron [O] 32 mg, and oral dexamethasone [D] 12 mg day 1; A 80 mg and D 8 mg days 2-3; D 8 mg day 4) in 1 of 2 periods, and a dual regimen (O 32 mg and D 20 mg day 1; D 8 mg bid days 2-4); the D dose was adjusted to account for known dexamethasone/aprepitant interaction. Oral (2 mg) and intravenous (1 mg) stable isotope ((13)C(5) (15)N(1))-labeled midazolam were simultaneously given as probes on days -1, 6, 8, 15, and 22 of each period. If the a priori 90% confidence interval for the day 6 geometric mean oral midazolam AUC(0-∞) ratio (triple/dual regimen) of fold-change from baseline was above 0.5, it would be concluded that there was no clinically meaningful between-regimen difference in CYP3A4 activity.

RESULTS

Day 6 oral midazolam AUC(0-∞) geometric mean fold-change from baseline was 0.84 (0.30-1.58 with A, 0.46-1.69 without A). The ratio of geometric mean oral midazolam AUC(0-∞) fold-changes was 1.00 (90% confidence interval 0.80, 1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant plus a 5-HT(3) antagonist and dexamethasone is unlikely to have a significant additional inductive effect on CYP3A4 activity beyond that of the dual regimen.

Single-dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anacetrapib, a potent cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor, in healthy subjects

AIMS

Anacetrapib is an orally active and potent inhibitor of CETP in development for the treatment of dyslipidaemia. These studies endeavoured to establish the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rising single doses of anacetrapib, administered in fasted or fed conditions, and to preliminarily assess the effect of food, age, gender and obesity on the single-dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anacetrapib.

METHODS

Safety, tolerability, anacetrapib concentrations and CETP activity were evaluated.

RESULTS

Anacetrapib was rapidly absorbed, with peak concentrations occurring at approximately 4 h post-dose and an apparent terminal half-life ranging from approximately 9 to 62 h in the fasted state and from approximately 42 to approximately 83 h in the fed state. Plasma AUC and C(max) appeared to increase in a less than approximately dose-dependent manner in the fasted state, with an apparent plateau in absorption at higher doses. Single doses of anacetrapib markedly and dose-dependently inhibited serum CETP activity with peak effects of approximately 90% inhibition at t(max) and approximately 58% inhibition at 24 h post-dose. An E(max) model best described the plasma anacetrapib concentration vs CETP activity relationship with an EC(50) of approximately 22 nm. Food increased exposure to anacetrapib; up to approximately two-three-fold with a low-fat meal and by up to approximately six-eight fold with a high-fat meal. Anacetrapib pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were similar in elderly vs young adults, women vs men, and obese vs non-obese young adults. Anacetrapib was well tolerated and was not associated with any meaningful increase in blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas food increased exposure to anacetrapib significantly, age, gender and obese status did not meaningfully influence anacetrapib pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

Effect of the cathepsin K inhibitor odanacatib on bone resorption biomarkers in healthy postmenopausal women: two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I studies

Inhibition of cathepsin K (CatK) is a potential new treatment for osteoporosis. In two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I studies, postmenopausal female subjects received odanacatib (ODN), an orally active, potent, and selective CatK inhibitor, once weekly for 3 weeks or once daily for 21 days. Bone turnover biomarkers, safety monitoring, and plasma ODN concentrations were assessed. These studies showed ODN to be well tolerated. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis revealed a long half-life (t(1/2); 66-93 h) consistent with once-weekly dosing. Pronounced reductions in C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (approximately 62%) and N-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen normalized to creatinine (NTx/Cr) (approximately 62%) at trough (C(168 h)) were seen following weekly administration. Robust reductions in CTx (up to 81%) and NTx/Cr (up to 81%) were seen following daily administration. ODN exhibits robust and sustained suppression of bone resorption biomarkers (CTx and NTx/Cr) at weekly doses > or = 25 mg and daily doses > or = 2.5 mg.

A multicenter study of the pharmacokinetics of lisinopril in pediatric patients with hypertension

The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of lisinopril were obtained in 46 children aged 6 months to 15 years. A lisinopril suspension (0.15 mg/kg per day) was administered to patients <6 years of age; the remaining children received lisinopril tablets, the daily dose being adjusted according to body weight, i.e., 2.5 mg if <25 kg, 5 mg if 25-45 kg, and 10 mg if >45 kg. Blood was drawn predose and on eight occasions postdose in children aged 4-15 years, and on five occasions in those aged <4 years. PK data are reported for the 46 children in terms of age groups: Group I (n=9), aged 6-23 months; Group II (n=8), aged 2-5 years; Group III (n=12), aged 6-11 years; Group IV (n=17), aged 12-15 years. The dose of lisinopril ranged from 3.07 mg/m(2) per day in Group I to 4.78 mg/m(2) per day in Group IV. C(max) of lisinopril, which occurred 5-6 h postdose, varied from 22 ng/ml in Groups I and II to 44 ng/ml in Groups III and IV; AUC(0-24 h) ranged from 301-311 ng.h/ml in Groups I and II to 550-570 ng.h/ml in Groups III and IV. No serious adverse events related to lisinopril were reported.

Pharmacokinetics of aprepitant after single and multiple oral doses in healthy volunteers

Aprepitant is the first NK1 receptor antagonist approved for use with corticosteroids and 5HT3 receptor antagonists to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The effective dose to prevent CINV is a 125-mg capsule on day 1 followed by an 80-mg capsule on days 2 and 3. Study 1 evaluated the bioavailability of the capsules and estimated the effect of food. The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) bioavailabilities of 125-mg and 80-mg final market composition (FMC) capsules, as assessed by simultaneous administration of stable isotope-labeled intravenous (i.v.) aprepitant (2 mg) and FMC capsules, were 0.59 (0.53, 0.65) and 0.67 (0.62, 0.73), respectively. The geometric mean (90% CI) area under the plasma concentration time curve (AUC) ratios (fed/fasted) were 1.2 (1.10, 1.30) and 1.09 (1.00, 1.18) for the 125-mg and 80-mg capsule, respectively, demonstrating that aprepitant can be administered independently of food. Study 2 defined the pharmacokinetics of aprepitant administered following the 3-day regimen recommended to prevent CINV (125 mg/80 mg/80 mg). Consistent daily plasma exposures of aprepitant were obtained following this regimen, which was generally well tolerated.

Clinical outcomes in antihypertensive treatment of type 2 diabetes, impaired fasting glucose concentration, and normoglycemia: Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

BACKGROUND

Optimal first-step antihypertensive drug therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) or impaired fasting glucose levels (IFG) is uncertain. We wished to determine whether treatment with a calcium channel blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor decreases clinical complications compared with treatment with a thiazide-type diuretic in DM, IFG, and normoglycemia (NG).

METHODS

Active-controlled trial in 31 512 adults, 55 years or older, with hypertension and at least 1 other risk factor for coronary heart disease, stratified into DM (n = 13 101), IFG (n = 1399), and NG (n = 17 012) groups on the basis of national guidelines. Participants were randomly assigned to double-blind first-step treatment with chlorthalidone, 12.5 to 25 mg/d, amlodipine besylate, 2.5 to 10 mg/d, or lisinopril, 10 to 40 mg/d. We conducted an intention-to-treat analysis of fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction (primary outcome), total mortality, and other clinical complications.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in relative risk (RR) for the primary outcome in DM or NG participants assigned to amlodipine or lisinopril vs chlorthalidone or in IFG participants assigned to lisinopril vs chlorthalidone. A significantly higher RR (95% confidence interval) was noted for the primary outcome in IFG participants assigned to amlodipine vs chlorthalidone (1.73 [1.10-2.72]). Stroke was more common in NG participants assigned to lisinopril vs chlorthalidone (1.31 [1.10-1.57]). Heart failure was more common in DM and NG participants assigned to amlodipine (1.39 [1.22-1.59] and 1.30 [1.12-1.51], respectively) or lisinopril (1.15 [1.00-1.32] and 1.19 [1.02-1.39], respectively) vs chlorthalidone.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide no evidence of superiority for treatment with calcium channel blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors compared with a thiazide-type diuretic during first-step antihypertensive therapy in DM, IFG, or NG.

Effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin. Aprepitant is a neurokinin-1 (NK1)-receptor antagonist developed as an antiemetic for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, two-period, parallel-group study. During period 1, warfarin was individually titrated to a stable prothrombin time (expressed as international normalized ratio, INR) from 1.3 to 1.8. Subsequently, the daily warfarin dose remained fixed for 10-12 days. During period 2, the warfarin dose was continued for 8 days, and on days 1-3 administered concomitantly with aprepitant (125 mg on day 1, and 80 mg on days 2 and 3) or placebo. At baseline (day -1 of period 2) and on day 3, warfarin pharmacokinetics was investigated. INR was monitored daily. During period 2, warfarin trough concentrations were determined daily.

RESULTS

The study was completed by 22 healthy volunteers (20 men, 2 women). On day 3, steady-state pharmacokinetics of warfarin enantiomers after aprepitant did not change, as assessed by warfarin AUC(0-24 h) and C(max). However, compared with placebo, trough S(-) warfarin concentrations decreased on days 5-8 (maximum decrease 34% on day 8, P<0.01). The INR decreased after aprepitant with a mean maximum decrease on day 8 of 11% versus placebo (P=0.011).

CONCLUSION

These data are consistent with a significant induction of CYP2C9 metabolism of S(-) warfarin by aprepitant. Subsequently, in patients on chronic warfarin therapy, the clotting status should be monitored closely during the 2-week period, particularly at 7-10 days, following initiation of the 3-day regimen of aprepitant with each chemotherapy cycle.

Effects of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics of ondansetron and granisetron in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

The neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist aprepitant, when given in combination with a corticosteroid and a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT(3))-receptor antagonist, has been shown to be effective for the prevention of acute and delated chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

OBJECTIVE

Two studies were conducted to determine whether concomitant administration of aprepitant altered the pharmacokinetic profiles of ondansetron and granisetron, two 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists commonly used as antiemetic therapy for CINV.

METHODS

The 2 studies were randomized, open-label, crossover trials conducted in healthy subjects aged between 18 and 46 years. Study 1 involved the following 2 treatment regimens: aprepitant 375 mg PO, dexamethasone 20 mg PO, and ondansetron 32 mg IV on day 1, followed by aprepitant 250 mg PO and dexamethasone 8 mg PO on days 2 through 5; and dexamethasone 20 mg PO and ondansetron 32 mg IV on day 1, followed by dexamethasone 8 mg PO on days 2 through 5. Study 2 involved the following 2 treatment regimens: aprepitant 125 mg PO with granisetron 2 mg PO on day 1, followed by aprepitant 80 mg PO on days 2 and 3; and granisetron 2 mg PO on day 1 only. Individual plasma samples were used to estimate area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(0- infinity )), peak plasma concentration, and apparent terminal elimination half-life (t(12)) of both ondansetron and granisetron.

RESULTS

Study 1 included 19 subjects (10 women, 9 men), and study 2 included 18 subjects (11 men, 7 women). Coadministration of aprepitant 375 mg produced a small but statistically significant increase in the AUC(0- infinity ) for intravenous ondansetron (from 1268.3 to 1456.5 ng.h/mL; P = 0.019), with no significant effect on peak concentration at the end of the infusion (360.8 ng/mL with aprepitant vs 408.4 ng/mL without) or t(12) (5.0 vs 4.5 hours, respectively). Coadministration of aprepitant 125 mg/80 mg did not alter the mean pharmacokinetic characteristics of oral granisetron (AUC(0- infinity ), 101.4 ng.h/mL with aprepitant vs 92.2 ng.h/mL without; maximum plasma concentration, 9.0 ng/mL with and without aprepitant; time to maximum plasma concentration, both 3.0 hours; t(12), 6.5 vs 6.9 hours, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant administration of aprepitant had no clinically significant effect on the mean pharmacokinetic characteristics of either ondansetron or granisetron in these healthy subjects.